Ballot Counters Should Be Impartial Judges - Not the Representatives of the Candidates

The Patch provided a link to the Memorandum of the Decision in the court case of Valerie Buckley vs Town of Easton Et Al.  It is my opinion that the judge made an unfair declaration that one of the registrars "erred" even though the action cited was made in accordance with the law.  I also feel that the judge made an interpretation of the spirit of a law which should be more carefully examined by the state supreme court.

Because there were so many write-in votes at the last Easton election many ballots had to be hand counted. The judge points out that there were two teams of ballot counters, consisting of one democrat and one republican each to do so.  If both counters agreed as to the intent of the voter, the vote would be counted accordingly.  The judge's memorandum also pointed out that the moderator of the election agreed that Val Buckley, (a republican who ran as a write in candidate against a republican nominee), did not have a representative as a ballot counter and there was no way for her to challenge a write in vote that was rejected.

The judge pointed out, that According to the Moderator's Handbook for Elections and Primaries, when hand counting a ballot, voter intent controls and two election officials from opposing parties or factions must agree on the voter's intent.

The judge pointed out that Buckley’s supporters could be called a faction.

The judge also wrote, "Although the provision in the moderator's handbook can be construed as permitting the assignment of counters from any two opposing parties, notwithstanding the parties or factions running in any particular election, a better reading of the handbook would afford presentation for a candidate who is not the major party nominee when hand counting ballots would be consistent with the spirit and the intent of [the] handbook..."

The judge then goes on and says that one of the registrar of voters erred in ruling that Buckley could not have a representative present for the hand counting of the ballots.   I have to question this.  The judge never presented a law or an instruction in the Moderator's Handbook that stated that candidates had a right to demand that their "representatives" be appointed as ballot counters.  Instead, she just said that the court was persuaded that such a right should have been given based on her interpretation and from the testimony of an expert witness (who was simply a moderator from a city) who felt that representatives should be present at a recount.  I always assumed that the reference to "factions” in the moderator’s handbook was included to cover the counting of votes in a primary, where the ballot counters would all be from a single party.

But how could a superior court judge decide that the registrar “erred” on a decision which was made in accordance with the law?  It doesn't make any sense.  The registrars have to try to obey the law as it is proscribed for them.   Does it say, anywhere in the law or in the election handbooks that the registrars have to allow candidates to have "representatives" act as counters?  I assume that a judge has powers to send "representatives" to oversee a recount but I am not aware of any law that empowers candidates to demand that their representatives take an active part in the counting of ballots for the contests that they are running in!  Does that interpretation really make sense?   If a write-in candidate can demand to have representatives what is going to stop any other candidate from making such a demand as well?  What if there are numerous write-in candidates from the same party running in an election that was not a primary.  Would the spirit of the law (according to this interpretation) mean that each of the candidates would then have the right to demand that representatives from 'their faction' of their party be added to the ballot counters?  And should official poll workers, who have to swear or pledge to act impartially, be subject to a census of which candidates they are going to support when our elections are conducted through secret ballot?

I have tried to get the Secretary of the State (who is the commissioner of elections) to appeal this part of the case on the basis of the law. I think that the idea that ballot counters might be drawn from opposing factions of a single party in an election where different parties are running candidates would be a clear misinterpretation of the intent of the moderator’s handbook.

Of most importance is the recognition that the ballot counters have to act as impartial judges of how the ballots are marked - not as the "representative" of some particular candidate.

Jim Bromer